By Ruben C Mendoza
Unlike other Christian traditions, the Roman Catholic Church has official teachings to which Catholics are expected to give their assent of faith (see Lumen Gentium 25). Dissent from any of those teachings is frowned upon to the extent that the catholicity of the dissenter is questioned.
However, many Catholics do not find satisfactory answers in the Church’s magisterial teachings regarding their existential questions.
These teachings appear inadequate and unresponsive to the sensibilities of many, particularly the LGBTQIA+ community, who feel that their experiences are overlooked and devalued by those who uphold the Church’s heteronormative doctrines. They cannot, in good conscience, give their assent to what they perceive as unfair and discriminatory teachings.
I was once in a forum with other theologians from two universities in Manila. One of them shared that he followed the see-judge-act methodology in his classes. He went on to explain that during the “seeing” part, he listened to the students’ understandings of the Church’s teachings.
In many instances, they had questions about the Church’s sexual ethics, including its teachings on homosexuality. According to him, his students were given the chance to articulate their concerns.
Then, in the “judging” part, he explained the Church’s teachings and “corrected” his students’ misunderstandings about the doctrines in question. In this way, he honestly believed that he seriously considered the context of his students and responded to them.
While this process may address specific concerns of students, as described by the teacher, there seems to be a misunderstanding of the significance of the students’ contexts and what the Christian faith conveys about them.
The teacher was evidently unaware of the dialectical relationship between context, with all its complexities, and the Word of God. He viewed the “judging” aspect as a one-way street in which the Word is merely applied to the context, assuming that the Church’s interpretation of that Word responds to their concerns.
He seemed to overlook that while the Church’s doctrines might be clear and meaningful to him, this does not imply that his explanation, originating from his context and rooted in the magisterium’s interpretation of God’s revelation, will be clear and meaningful to the students. He also appeared to believe that with the right explanation, students would have a light bulb moment.
If we are honest, many theology students in Catholic colleges and universities in the Philippines have questions about the Christian faith. Many feel alienated from the Church, and some have ceased participating in its liturgy.
Still others reject what they consider the Church’s indoctrination efforts, similar to the ideological programs of other interest groups. As one of my students said, “Religion is hypocritical,” because he finds a dissonance between the Church’s teaching about the centrality of love and the way it treats marginalized groups or sectors within the Church.
If we are to do and teach theology inductively, Catholic theologians must be humble enough to admit what they don’t know, that the teachings of the Church do not answer all of life’s questions, and that the last word of theology still has to be written.
They also need to remember that the teachings of the Church are not the last word on those topics, but instead starting points for contemporary discussion and can be subjected to criticisms that lead to their development.
It is also essential to consider that the concerns articulated by students should take precedence over what theologians believe they ought to know. Orthodoxy is important, but it should not prevent us from further exploring its meanings and even expressing them in ways that are sensitive to various contexts, lest those same teachings become tools for discrimination and oppression.
In my experience, students are turned off by teachers who, while rightly being true to their beliefs, do not consider other perspectives and are closed to any theological dialogue.
While we need to help our students know, understand, and appreciate the Catholic faith, the purpose of theologizing is to foster a ‘thinking faith’ and cultivate more committed disciples of Jesus in today’s world.
It is crucial that we provide students with the space to question established traditions. In doing so, we need to remind them to be open and not to stop looking for answers. It may happen that we won’t have answers to our students’ questions and that we will find it difficult to affirm magisterial teachings in light of the students’ objections.
When we are placed in that corner, let us embark on a shared journey with them and seek answers to those questions together. Like our students, we are called and challenged to deepen our understanding of God’s Word and, if necessary, unlearn our previous misunderstandings of that same Word.
We need to give our religious assent to God’s Word in order to deepen our communion in faith.
However, that does not mean we should refrain from asking questions or raising concerns about the Church’s doctrine and life.
We must remember that divine revelation is not only a past occurrence, for the Christian God continues to reveal Godself to us in our everyday experiences, always inviting us to be God’s friends. Each of us is called to discern God’s presence as this God reveals Godself to us.
Engaging in and teaching theology will provide a map that helps us navigate life as we journey with others toward the Kingdom. – UCA News
*The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official editorial position of UCA News.
